New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-06-11
rHR CELT7C.BRTTANNIO JUDGMENE

vantages of being members OF the Union
without being politically incorporated in IT,
|
THE CELTICBRITANNIO JUDGMENT
The INQUIRY into the Celtic Britannia col
lision has resulted in the censure OF
both the captains and also the second officer
Of the Britannia. The justification OF this
finding is not apparent About the courts
remarks ON Mr.. Mex enzics case there appears
to be much confusion; for he Is censured fof
not slowing the Britannia, while Captain Perry
is approved for ordering full speed ON the
vessel. The court says that In its opinion
sin ordering full speed on the Britannia after
having sighted tho Celtic no Captain Perry
exercised the best Judgment, which probably
avorted much more serious disaster to his
own vessel and to the Celtic Yet not only
Is the second officer OF the britannia biamoo
for not doing what according to the language
above quoted, would have been bad Judgment
and disastrous but Captain Perry himself Is
heavily scored for failing to check the speed
Of his ship after sighting the Celtic, What
the court really finds 1t is indeed hard to
discover. Ii expresses the opinion IN one
Mace that IL the Brtannic's speed had been
slaclsencd, "the possibility Of the collision
would have been considerably lessened, ano
probably the collision might have been aver'eo
altogether Yet in another place 1t declares
that in ordering full speed the captain OF the
Britannia EXERCISED the best judgments and
anrobably ayerted a much more serious dis
aster.'
The court seems to think Itself on firm
oround in consuming both captains for main
L 10 Of N
weather. But there is not any certainty thai
tho weather was thick. 1t must be remem'
bered that when being examined both captains
ard all the officers and quartermasters whose
testimony was taken insisted on declaring that
tho weather was not TO say thick that 1t was
nossible 70 see a couple of miles. Now when
Il ic nossiblo TO see two miles at sea the log
cannot be called heavy, and it is orcn TO ques
ton whether a passenger steamer ought W oe
blamed for not slowing down to hall speed
under the circumstances. But the evidence
seems to show that the density OF inc 10y
WAS uneven. 1t was patchy. Tho vessels TAI
ont of comparatively thin strata into com
r,aratiyely thick ones. so far as can DO maze
ont and in so uncertain a state Of atmosphere
il Is difficult to reach accurate definitions. The
cmrt speal<s strongly and sensiby on the
deficiencies Of the signal system. In fac''
there is no system, or no co IT, for the possible
signals arc so few that in practice the meaning
of either Of them can only be guessed at Clear
". too the one-minute interval between log
signals Is too long. In very thick wea her II
would afford ample time for collision
Twenty five seconds is long enough interval
especially in waters which may be crowded
L. is less than Just TO blame Captain Perry
for not giving distinctive whistles to INC
other vessel TO moderate her course when IL
Is acknowledged that the only signal he could
have given was open TO mislnterpretauon, ana
might very easily have had precisely the op
rogi,e effect 10 that intended. The suggestion
for sharp whistle to be placed under tnc
bridge for use in emergencies is god one
Having different tone TO that oil inc ios
whistle there would be no danger OF mistakes
as to tho meaning Of It's blasts. Even WIN
this Improvement, however, the code OF signals
needs amendment and development and THIS
work ought to be undertaken at once AS re
cards the general bearing OF the courts mdg
rent Il must be said that the evidence does
not annear to warrant the conclusions. Proof
~ any clear error even Of Judgment on the
part Of either Of the captains is wanting. In
the present defective state of the signal code
and the optional use Of the poor signals alone
available. ccnsure Of the commanders Tor not
cmplovino such futile methods is out OF place.
unreasonable, and captions. Moreover INC
findings arc so inconsistent, contradictory anu
confused rs to indicate either great careless
ness. lack Of comprehension or infenorty o'
Judgment on the part of tho members. 1t looks
as if general impression had prevailed In the
court that somebody must be found guilty OF
something. and as the evidence did not furnish
any hclp 10 this conclusion muddled verdict
roeulted